Red vs. Blue Lasers Complicate DVD's Future

bnavarro writes: "The EE Times is reporting that the DVD Forum's Steering Committee voted this week to approve the use of low-bit-rate compression for high-definition DVD. The DVD Forum's decision, made at a meeting Tuesday (Feb. 26) in Tokyo, to stick with a red-laser-based scheme but switch to low-bit-rate compression, came only a week after nine of the world's biggest electronics companies agreed to promote a blue-laser-based format for next-generation video and computer optical disks."

Comments

Re:What's the point? - HDTV is the point

[dat00ket]

What's the point in changing standards when the current one is ok? I mean current DVD technology is good enough for most video uses. This "improvement" can merely scare people from buying that DVD players to replace their VHS systems. It's too early to change standards! I mean VHS lasted for more than ten years and so should the current DVD technology.

The point is that while DVD looks great on most standard TV's, HDTV's are another matter. Suddenly you can see lots of compression artifacts. This isn't much of an issue now, but it will be soon enough.

I doubt DVD2, or whatever it will be called, will arrive in the next 5 years and if it does it will be in parallell with the current technology and cater mostly to videophiles and gadget freaks. There's a lot of money to be made from early adopters.

I for one think it's a great idea to decide on a standard before companies start producing their own technologies. That has caused problems again and again. Nice to see people are learning from past mistakes.

Something interesting about green laser pointers..

[seanadams.com]

What's the difference between blue, red and green lasers?

Green laser pointers use an infra-red laser diode, with a yag crystal to double the frequency. Also, they increase the brightness of the beam by turning in on and off at about a 60/40 duty cycle, while driving the diode at a higher current than it could handle at 100% duty. You can actually see this by moving the dot back and forth quickly - it appears as a dashed line.

They're a neat toy if you've got $400 to burn (last I checked).

Re:MS Involvement?

[FreeUser]

I'm not a Microsoft fan, but I've got to admit that idea of downloading a 700 MB .wmv file, burning it to a CD and being able to play it back in my DVD player at DVD quality is quite enticing.

And what on earth makes you think Microsoft's patented DRM will ever allow you to do that? If you want to be able to move your content from medium to medium as you see fit, without restriction, your only real long term hope is to use free software. Of course, if the SSSCA is passed theres a good chance free operating systems, such as FreeBSD and GNU/Linux, will be outlawed as a result.

Re:Makes perfect sense for HDTV

[Richthofen80]

Actually, people are buying HDTV for DVD players now. Progressive scanning DVD players, that is. 480p is technically a DTV standard and you can only watch 480p on a DTV or HDTV. Most people who buy HDTV (and I sell a lot of HDTV) buy a progressive scanning DVD players. (you can get one for like $170 now)

Also, the 16x9 formats usually have an enhanced mode for widescreen DVDs. So there's a lot of reason to have an HDTV now and use existing DVD technology. 480p is still pretty sharp compared to the crap we watch over cable.

The REAL reason why content providers want red

[eyefish]

I cannot believe these industry "expert" groups. They claim that the main reason for using red lasers is cost. However, they seem to "forget" that using a low-bit rate technology as opposed to a blue laser actually will INCREASE costs since supporting MPEG-4 will require higher processing power, and thus more powerful and more expensive silicon.

BUT most important to consumers is the fact that MPEG-4 compression is just NOT SUITABLE for high-definition content which is meant to be seen on a decently large screen (29 inches and above). MPEG-4 simply produces too many artifacts (even today with low-bit-rate MPEG-2 you can see on cable how dark images in motion seen to leave a "ghost" behind).

So now the REAL REASON why they (the content providers) still want to pursue red-laser: They get to give consumers a low-quality version of the video image!!! By doing this they feel they are protecting their investment, while in reality they are simply giving consumers a low-quality solution.

If and once they provide this stupid red laser approach for high resolution video, what they effectively will have done is invite third parties to come with competing high-quality products (which sadly will probably will never be supported with popular content since there is a monopoly among the content providers and media player producers), OR some hackers will come up with a scheme to rip high-quality video out of HD broadcast (for TV or movie theatres) and distribute it in a competing format themselves over the Internet. In other words, Napster all over again because for the same reason as before: they industry is NOT thinking about what consumers want, and what consumers want is a high-quality display system to match their new TV.